Actually, one view and one idiotic rant from someone who should not be speaking in public on ANY subject. You're not wrong. As a rule, we should all be skeptical of anyone whose first response to technological innovation is to cast shade and call it a scam or a worthless idea with no real potential. I'm old enough to remember when people I knew and respected confidently predicted that personal computers would never catch on. Many of those same people later laughed at the idea that the internet would ever amount to anything more than a curiosity. The more things change, the more some things - and people - remain the same. |
|
|
|
The SEC has guidelines for raising money. If you raise money from investors they want to know who is responsible for the money raised, what it is raised for, and the proper reporting and disclosure. There are also guidelines for who you can accept money from and in some cases how much money you can accept from them, depending on which type of fundraising program you have chosen. These are all important factors for consumer protection and handling fraud. The SEC chairman Jay Clayton has already stated he is not going to change the securities laws for crypto. To me that means regardless of whether or not you are selling a token to raise funds the same rules and regulations apply. This is why we have chosen equity fundraising for DNotes Global through the Reg D 506 (c) program initially. Alan also has a great interview regarding this here: In Interview, Alan Yong Addresses ICOs, NextGen VC, and Regulatory ComplianceAll true, but that's the problem. if Congress is concerned that the SEC's approach is wrong or inadequate, then the proper approach is for Congress to pass enabling legislation that would clarify its expectations in this area. Unfortunately, our legislators have been content to cede much of their authority to regulatory agencies and other bureaucrats, instead of tackling problems themselves. That's why it takes so long for regulations to adapt to new technologies and shifts in the economy - because regulators can only rely on the legislation that they have in hand when those innovations appear. When Congress fails to do its job, confusion reigns. Under current law, ICOs must register or be granted an exemption. That's the SEC's interpretation of the rules, and any offerings that are not in compliance with those requirements are, as Clayton noted, illegal. Congress has the right and power to overrule that interpretation and provide ICOs with greater freedom to operate. It can also choose to impose more draconian requirements for those offerings. But that's all on Congress' shoulders. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
